رکن‌های پنج‌هجایی در عروض عربی و فارسی و کارکرد آنها در عروض فارسی

The identification of prosodic feet and their syllable arrangements have an undeniably important role in identifying and categorizing families of poetic meters (buhūr) in Arabic and Persian prosody. Any confusion in the identification of poetic feet can lead to confusion in understanding and teaching prosody, just as proper organization of feet can facilitate the classification of meters and prosodic pedagogy. In this article, we will consider the Arabic pentasyllabic feet and their effect on Persian traditional prosody and evaluate the viewpoints of contemporary prosodists since Parviz Natel Khanlari, Abolhassan Najafi, and Laurence Paul Elwell-Sutton. We will argue that, based on the poetic evidence, the use of pentasyllabic feet significantly helps us teach and categorize Persian meters and remove one of the important shortcomings of Persian prosody. Moreover, the present article will emphasize the necessity of using pentasyllabic feet in the study of prosody and will discuss the relationship between such feet and the circular ones (vazn-e dowrī).
 
1. Introduction
Grouping poetic feet has been one of the most important issues of Arabic and Persian prosody. This is because, on the one hand, learning any meter involves a knowledge of its feet and meters are remembered in terms of their foot arrangement, and, on the other hand, it is the foot arrangement that determines the place of each meter in the system of meters. Also, the foot arrangement defines the relationship between each meter and its family.   
 
2. Theoretical Framework
There are two different theories in Persian prosody: traditional and modern. I have adopted the modern theory in this study to specify prosodic feet and arrangement of them in meters, although, through a historical view, I have commented on the traditional theory, as well.
 
3. Methodology
I have taken a comparative approach in this article involving Persian and Arabic prosody, but I have mostly focused on Persian here. Also, I have provided a historical view of the development of pentasyllabic feet through the centuries.
 
4. Results and Discussion
Of the ten principal feet of Arabic poetry, two are pentasyllabic: mufā’alatun and mutafā’ilun. Based on the rules of zihāf (pl. zihāfāt) and ‘illa (pl. ilal) of Arabic poetry (which allow certain limited modifications to feet without changing their type), we may obtain the following feet from the mutafā’ilun foot which are named muraffal feet: mustaf’ilātun, mafā’ilātun, and mufta’ilātun. According to Arabic prosody, these feet are all found at the last foot of the second hemistich (ḍarb).
 
- Pentasyllabic Feet in Persian Poetry
Traditional prosodists have admitted four pentasyllabic feet (i.e., mustaf’ilātun, mufā’ilātun, mufta’ilātun and fā’ilīyātun) on condition that they solely appear at the end of the second half-lines. Due to the fact that meters with pentasyllabic feet were rare until the 14^th century, prosodists didn’t deem it necessary to set the rules for using this kind of feet. 
 
- Pentasyllabic Feet in Modern Prosody
Mas’ud Farzad was the first modern prosodist who considered pentasyllabic feet in his prosodic system. Compared to the traditional prosodists, Farzad admits a different number of pentasyllabic feet, but the main difference between Farzad and those prosodists lies in the fact that he doesn’t restrict the position of such feet to the end of lines (i.e., the end of the second half-lines). He believes that such feet can be found in both muttafiq-al-arkān (single-foot-type) and mutanāwib-al-arkān (alternate-foot-type) meters.  
Abulhassan Najafi recognizes pentasyllabic feet along with trisyllabic and tetrasyllabic ones, but does not view them as non-problematic. For him, pentasyllabic feet include fa’alīyātun, mufta’ilātun, mustaf’ilatun, mufā’ilātun, mufā’īlatun, mustafā’ilun, mutafā’ilun, mufā’alatun, fā’ilīyātun, and mustaf’ilātun. Repeating each of these feet would make a family of pentasyllabic meters.  
 
- The Benefit of Pentasyllabic Feet in Persian Prosody
The important point missed by prosodists is the fact that pentasyllabic feet do not have same characteristics. We may classify pentasyllabic feet into three groups. Such feet may be made up of 1) three long and two short syllables: mufā’alatun (ᴗ- ᴗᴗ-) and mutafāilun (ᴗᴗ-ᴗ-); 2) two short and three long syllables: fa’alīyātun (ᴗᴗ---), mufta’ilātun (-ᴗᴗ--), mustaf’ilatun (--ᴗᴗ-), mufā’ilātun (ᴗ-ᴗ--), mufā’īlatun (ᴗ--ᴗ-), and mustafā’ilun (-ᴗ-ᴗ-); and 3) one short and four long syllables: fā’ilīyātun (-ᴗ---) and mustaf’ilātun (--ᴗ--).
In perfect meters formed by repeating each of the feet in the second and third groups, unlike in the first group, each foot can have a neutral syllable (i.e., can be short, long or overlong) at the end. Thus, the poet can make use of an overlong syllable at the end of each foot in the middle of the half-line in addition to the neutral syllable at the end of the half-line. In this way, each foot could serve as part of a circular meter, and each half-line, rather than being formed of two parts, could have three or four parts, each of which could function as a half-hemistich or half-misrā’ (i.e., half-half-line) in circular meters (‘awzān-e dowrī).   
 
5. Conclusion
The following are the most important points that could be concluded from this study:

Actually practiced pentasyllabic feet are fa’alīyātun, mufta’ilātun, mustaf’alatun, mufā’ilātun, mufā’ilatun, mustafā’ilun, mutafā’ilun, mufā’ilatun, fā’ilīyātun, and mustaf’ilātun. Each of these, when repeated, could make a family of meters, but they cannot be alternated with other types of feet to make meters. In other words, they are not found in mutanāwib-al-arkān meters.  
Unlike in traditional prosody, pentasyllabic feet are not supposed to be exclusively restricted to the end of half-lines.
Each complete pentasyllabic foot, except for mutafāilun and mufā’alatun, can serve as part of a circular meter.
Meters formed by these feet may end in incomplete feet. In such a situation, the complete feet can no longer serve as part of a circular meter.

Select Bibliography
Elwell- Sutton, L. 1976. The Persian Metres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farzad, M. 1966. Mathematical Basics of Persian prosody. Tehran: Printing house of Bank Melli Iran.[in Persian]
Ghahramani Moghbel, A. 2010. Poetic feet: study of a historical problem in Persian prosody. Tehran: Niloofar Publications. [in Persian]
Ghahramani Moghbel, A. 2011. Arabic prosody and rhyme. Tehran\ Bushehr: Samt Publications\ Persian Gulf University Publications. [in Persian]
Ghahramani Moghbel, A. 2018. Definition of imperfect foot and its importance in new Persian prosody. The Persian metrics: A historical study. Proceedings of the third Congress on Persian metrics. Ed. O. Tabibzadeh. Tehran: Niloofar Publications, 37-57. [in Persian]
Najafi, A. 2014. Circular meters: A problem that ancient Persian prosody has ignored it. Name-ye Farhangestan journal, 13(2), 6-18. [in Persian]
Najafi, A. 2018. Classification of the Persian meters. Ed. O. Tabibzadeh. Tehran: Niloofar Publications. [in Persian]
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, M. 2014. Me’yar al-ash’ar. Ed. Ali-Asghar Ghahramani Moghbel. Tehran: University Publication Center. [in Persian]
Shams-e Qeis-e Razi, M. 1981. Al-Mo’jam fi ma’a’ir ash’ar al-‘ajam. Ed. Qazvini & Modarres-e Razavi. Tehran: Bookstore of Zovvar. [in Persian]